Liverpool Strategic Investment Framework

Yes, in typical local authority speak, it's a mouthful, but it's a big name with big ideas that wants to change the look and feel of the city over the next 15 years.

It is the follow-up development plan from Liverpool Vision, the people who brought us the Strategic Regeneration Framework 2001, that plan included Liverpool ONE, the Arena, the re-imagining of Lime St and aiming to be the 2008 European Capital of Culture; so we can be fairly confident that the things Liverpool Vision dreams up have a good chance of being implemented.

Here's the promo video



Launched on 1st November at an event hosted at the Echo Arena the SIF is a new plan to bring a more coherent structure the the recent developments and the city as a whole, you can read the whole plan here. There are fewer of the major set-pieces that the SRF 2001 brought to us, the SIF seems more concerned about improving the overall feel of the city rather than large set-piece building projects and for the most part it looks very hopeful.

If this were a Bond movie what has gone before would be the dramatic pre-credit sequence, the plot and the character exposition are still to come.

Of most interest to us is what this will all mean for cyclists, as I have shown in the past, the opportunity provided by new developments and lots of money can easily be missed if there is a lack of will or imagination. It is vital that with this latest plan the developers understand that no city can consider itself to be a city of the 21st century without building in to its very fabric the most efficient form of transport known to man.

Thanks to Gas2 for this graphic

The SIF doesn't say an awful lot about cycling but it does offer a little encouragement. One of the proposals is called 'Great Streets' and recognises the importance, attractiveness and opportunity available in some of the city centre's largest roads; the Strand, Dale St, Water St, Lime St and Hope St. The SIF says

Improvements to pedestrian and cycle movement along Water Street / Dale Street, to provide a continuous safe and legible route from the Waterfront to Lime Street Station. The street is currently dominated by buses and little else, with the streetscape quality inconsistent. With Princes Dock becoming a point of embarkation and disembarkation for the world’s cruise liners, this will present significant opportunities to invest in the public realm, to generate significant visitor footfall and leverage private sector investment.

Exhibition Road in London is cited as an example of what this might mean, I've not visited Exhibition Road so I'm not exactly sure what this means, but as a shared space there is always the problem of might is right.

The Strand is to be given several pedestrian 'bridges' at key points, the thought being that the Strand is like a river bisecting the city, this is a polite way of putting it. The Strand is a hostile urban motorway with tens of thousands of motor vehicles travelling along it each day most of whom seem to be breaking the speed limit, often by a considerable margin, 50mph in a 30mph zone is commonplace. It cuts off the retail and transport sectors in the centre from the tourist attractions at the riverside. The current situation is, frankly, shameful and embarrassing to think that the hundreds of thousands of tourists visiting the city have to negotiate this route to see some of the city's best sights. The plans for the Strand seem *ahem*, unambitious and I will deal with them in a separate post.

The document returns later to consider walking and cycling as a separate issue.

In terms of connectivity, Liverpool has a legible grid of streets at a scale that is appropriate for walking and cycling around the centre.

However, there are areas of the city that are disconnected and feel ‘cut-off’ from the City Centre’s activity and energy due to the detailed design of street layouts which focus primarily on vehicle movement with walking and cycling considered secondary. Improving the connections for walking and cycling along key strategic routes will help to ‘tie-in’ currently dislocated areas into the city core.

Improving the journey for walking and cycling can involve:
• Appropriate sign posting
• Improved lighting
• High-quality surfaces which show continuation throughout the route
• Improved priority in favour of people walking and cycling, and
• Promotion of the route to the visitor where appropriate.  

They are making some of the right noises but we won't really know until we see the detail of the plans.

Overall I think the general aim of the SIF is admirable and by making it a more livable city it will encourage the investment it seeks. It's now up to us to make sure we aren't fobbed off with unsuitable cycle facilities and in this aim we must be uncompromising, only the highest standards of infrastructure must be allowed. Opportunities have been missed in the past, one again Liverpool is given the opportunity to become a leading 21st century city, one of the best cycling cities in the kingdom, let's hope this time the developers can see which way the tide is turning on the Mersey.

How much space do you need?

A letter has appeared in this week's Wirral Globe complaining about cyclists riding on the road rather than the cycle path on the promenade at New Brighton, King's Parade. No particular details are given about the exact location or time of day or the ages or genders of the cyclists. All we know is that there were four or five of them, riding two abreast on the road, traffic had to slow to overtake them and they can be described as 'ignorant'.

King's Parade begins at the location in the map below and heads north east from here, it's a lovely place for a stroll or a ride the only thing that makes it unpleasant is the weight of traffic when it is busy and the speed of traffic when it is quiet.

View Larger Map

It is a section of the North Wirral cycle route and forms a link between two other promenades where there is no motor traffic.

It is a 30 mph dual carriageway boulevard with a promenade alongside the seafront. The part I measured from Google satellite view is approximately 31m wide from seawall to the edge of the inner field. This is divided up, give or take...

• 3m pedestrian path
• 2m cycle path
• 7.5m road
• 2.5m central reservation
• 8m road with an additional 4m wide parking lane
• 4m pavement

Points of note about these dimensions. 

• The 2.5m wide central reservation is unnecessary on a 30mph road.
• Each lane, including the parking lane is 4m wide, this is twice as wide as a car and 1.5m wider than a bus or container wagon.

Look at how dwarfed the car is by the width of the parking lane.

The road is not that heavily trafficed for its size except for on the sunniest days of summer however cars do tend to speed along it, I have seen cars doing 60-70mph when the road is quiet, 40mph is common at all times.

The pavement on the sea wall side of the road is popular with walkers out for a stroll and dog walkers, though they do have a tendency to stray into the cycle lane, and it is popular with families so there can be many small children running around the pavement.

Cars park on both sides of the road, but only the westbound side has an official parking lane, on the eastbound side cars park against the kerb in lane 1.

So firstly, since the cycle path is provided what is it like for a cyclist to use? This varies depending on time of day/year. If it is quiet then it is reasonably adequate, there are no junctions of note to cause you to stop but the surface is made of paving slabs rather than smooth tarmac, you can cruise along at a fair old pace. On a busy day it is much different, children, balls, dogs, inattentive walkers, fishing lines being tossed around, it's a very hazardous place for the cyclist and the other pavement users, consequently great caution must be shown and speeds reduced to below 10mph, sometimes lower, and it's not uncommon to have to come to a halt while an errant child or beast is removed from the cycle lane by its owner. One might also come across other cyclists of varying speeds travelling in either direction on this rather narrow 2m wide lane, again causing you to slow or stop. There is also one platform type area where the cycle lane disappears entirely.

As a result faster riders might think it convenient to use the road rather than the cycle lane, as is their right. The road is broad, direct and has reasonably good visibility, only hampered by the cars parked along it which can range in number from a handful to hundreds.

A cyclist heading eastbound will, if there are no parked cars, occupy the first metre or two of the lane; or if there are parked cars, the space between the car and the dividing line to lane 2. Even riding two abreast they are unlikely to venture in to lane 2. Leaving the entirety of lane 2 to the motor traffic. On the westbound side a cyclist can cycle within the parking lane as it is so broad, at worst they might ride in lane 1 but again lane 2 will always be free. Either way, motorists always have one entire lane to themselves and if they are delayed by cyclists it is almost certainly because the cyclists will be passing parked cars on the westbound carriageway, yet it is the cyclists who get the stick rather than the drivers of the parked cars.

Let us agree with the author of the letter on one thing, that it would be better if the cycles were not using the road, it would also be better if they were not using the pavement and there is clearly enough space to allow this. There is so much space that you could improve the environment for every type of road user without inconveniencing any of them, we have 31m of available space to play with!

The 3m pedestrian space can become 3.5m on the shore side and the lesser used 4m path on the inland side can become 3.5m. Cyclists can have 4m wide dual direction paths on either side of the road. The road can become 2x3m lanes and a 2m parking lane in each direction. The central reservation can be got rid of.

[Edit - for a much better idea than mine see Mark's comment below.]

From my knowledge of the area I think the author's complaint is probably unnecessarily picky, the road is so broad they couldn't have been inconvenienced for more than a few seconds, the cyclists probably had good reason to prefer the road to the cycle lane and it's quite possible that cars being parked on the road was the cause of the cyclists being in the way. In any case for any council wanting to implement some seriously quality cycle infrastructure the vast amounts of space available in this area surely make this a 'gimme' for a showcase facility, it only requires the will and the money. Until then faster riders will continue to use the road and motorists will simply have to put up with it.

In Praise of Liverpool City Council (sort of)

Last night I was heading to the Wavertree area of town from the city centre, I used to live in Wavertree when I was a student but I've not been back there walking or cycling in 10 or 12 years. I took the route that I used to stagger walk each day to and from the pub university, it involves going along Myrtle St, across Crown St Park and then down Smithdown Lane.


View Larger Map

Unfortunately I can't remember what Myrtle St used to look like but I think it must have been a typical side road, one lane each way, arrow straight, high kerbs, I got a hell of a surprise when I returned there. Just look at all the Dutchness in these pictures

A 20 mph zone, speed humps, those two are now recognisable on British Streets, but look what else there is, an advanced, protected traffic light for cycles with it's own sequence. A zigzagged road designed to naturally slow vehicles by not being completely straight.

The road leads to a residential area which has no access for cars to the main road on the other side so there is no rat running.

However a bit of filtered permeability later and we have a lovely dedicated cycle path (yes there does seem to be pedestrians walking in it in this photo from Google)

At the top of this path we meet Crown St running perpendicular to us, Crown St used to be busy with fast moving traffic, but LCC has installed quite broad cycle lanes and speed humps along its length. Best of all though is the traffic lights that cross Crown St from the cycle path into the park, ride up to them at a slowish pace and they change automatically so you never have to stop!

So why am I only sort of praising Liverpool City Council?

It's quite simple really, this little 200m stretch of path proves that somebody at LCC knows exactly how to implement the Dutch model, all the major principles are in evidence here.

• Segregation in time and space
• Reduced speed zones
• Traffic calming road design
• Reducing traffic through restricted access
• Maintaining momentum and allowing cyclists to go the shortest most direct route while sending cars the long way and reducing their priority in the hierarchy.

So the simple question is if they can do it here, why not everywhere else?

It is also interesting that this is the only place in the city I have found with this standard of infrastructure, between the university and the residential area with the largest student population, it's as though the Council think only students want to cycle. Generally speaking they don't have kids, probably don't carry a lot of equipment or huge amounts of shopping and have fairly restricted travel needs. The mindset at the council must be that people with slightly greater needs or money than students won't want to cycle, if you have kids for example, but of course if you have kids and want to cycle segregated facilities are even more important.

Liverpool is not exactly a rich city either with some of the most deprived wards in the country, it's not just students who are too poor to drive. The poorest areas are in the north of the city, Bootle and Walton yet these are the areas with some of the worst cycling facilities. Meanwhile the leafy south of the city seems to have a few more cycle lanes. It was noticeable too that at the Liverpool Cycle Forum meetings most of the participants lived in the south of the city and were perhaps better educated and more affluent than the city average.

But what about the poor people in the north? Without decent cycle facilities many will be forced to scrape together just enough money to keep a car on the road, reducing the money they have to spend on other necessities and comforts, if they could cycle they may have more money to spend in their local areas rather than it going to multinational corporations, people on bicycles shop in their areas and spend more money in their towns, this is why cycling infrastructure is a good investment.